Bristol Technology, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation
Economic Advice in Litigation
The Situation
In July 1999 Microsoft Corp. was charged with violation of United States antitrust laws when it declined to renew Bristol's Windows NT source-code license on "reasonable" terms.
NERA's Role
A NERA economist testified that forcing intellectual property owners to license their intellectual property on terms that do not reflect its value would have a chilling effect on innovation and would harm competition.
The Result
The Connecticut jury found that Microsoft did not violate antitrust law, and concluded that Bristol was entitled to one dollar in damages because Microsoft had violated a Connecticut statute.
